D 131 
C5 
opy 1 



131 

5 



-/.«' 



COUNTERPARTS 



THE 



BASIS OF HARMONY 



A LESSON IN PHILOSOPHY 



BY 

M. A. CLANCY, OF WASHINGTON, D. C 



FROM THE METAPHYSICAL MAGAZINE FOR APRIL, 1898. 



PRINTED FOR THE AUTHOR. 



Washington, D. C: 

Law Reporter Co., Printers, 518 Fifth St. N. W. 

1808. 




/ 



Transfer 



-"* 



COUNTERPARTS THE BASIS 
OF HARMONY.* 

A LESSON IN PHILOSOPHY. 



If a new fact before a jury will suffice to reverse its 
verdict, why may not a new view in Philosophy serve to re- 
verse the verdict of mankind? Many instances might be 
cited where a new view has entirely revolutionized the 
opinion of mankind, but perhaps one of the most interest- 
ing is the Copernican in place of the Ptolemaic view of the 
astronomical universe — the heliocentric in place of the geo- 
centric system. It can not be said that this change of view- 
ing the facts changed the facts themselves, but it so changed 
their value in the estimation of mankind that an entirely 
new science of astronomy was founded. So, if we may be 
able to take a new position of observation with reference to 
certain important Philosophical facts and considerations, we 
may be able to lay the foundations of a new and important 
science affecting in a vital manner the interests of mankind. 
A transfer of attention is necessary from mere facts to the 
relations between them — the laws and principles governing 
them. The claim is here made that "Counterparts the 
Basis of Harmony," when considered in its most far-reach- 
ing sense, becomes a formula of universal application, and 

* COUNTERPART. — 2. One of two persons or things correspond- 
ing or fitting together ; one who, or that which, supplements or an- 
swers to another, as the impression to the seal ; something taken 
with another for the completion of either; a complement; fellow ; 
match ; hence an opposite ; as, the right-hand glove is the counter- 
part of the left; she is the counterpart of her husband, calm when 
he is passionate. 

HARMONY.— 3. Completeness and perfection resulting from di- 
versity in unity ; agreement in relation ; order ; in art, a normal 
state of competeness in the relations of things to each other. — Stand- 
ard Dictionary. 



enables us to comprehend and unravel the thousands of 
heretofore inexplicable enigmas in Science, Religion, Phil- 
osophy and Art. Let us see whether we can gain a clear 
comprehension of its meaning. 

The dimensions of the New Jerusalem, as given by John 
the Revelator, are thus stated: 

"The city lieth four-square, and the length is as large as 
the breadth; and he measured the city with the reed, 
twelve thousand furlongs. The length and the breadth and 
the height of it are equal." 

I refer to this, not for the purpose of a description of this 
heavenly city, but to draw attention to the general subject 
of measurement. Length, breadth and height are the three 
directions which, when co-ordinated, constitute the basis of 
all terrestrial admeasurement, both positive and negative; 
that is, whether we measure the dimensions of the earth, or 
the vacuum, or space which it occupies, we use these same 
three directions. According to the record, the heavenly 
city was a cube, the full, complete and perfect form of sci- 
entific measurement. When we consider these directions, 
we perceive that each is a generalization from two infinities. 
If we think up and down, forward and backward, or right 
and left — the directions of height, length and breadth — the 
mind may go out along each line in those directions infi- 
nitely, or until it stops, and the balance or equation is found 
at their point of intersection. This point is the harmony or 
equation between the two opposite infinities along each of 
the three lines, and these opposite infinities are counterparts. 

This figure which I have attempted to describe is the 
foundation of all astronomical and geometrical measure- 
ment, and it may be said here, incidentally, that it is, ana- 
logically, also the basis of all mental or immaterial measure- 
ments as well; that is to say, it is only by the co-ordination 
of differing, diverging and converging lines of thought that 
any conclusion can be rightly arrived at in logic or mathe- 
matics. In another place wo are informed that the ineas- 



urement of the New Jerusalem is the measure of the angel, 
which is the measure of a man. For instance, all measure- 
ments on the earth are reckoned from the six points, East, 
West, North, South, Zenith and Nadir, and the same points 
or lines are observed in astronomical observations and 
measurements. The superiority of this mode of measure- 
ment is appreciated when we go back to the time when no 
such means of measurement existed, when the earth was 
supposed to be a plain extending indefinitely, the sun and 
stars moving in the heavens in accordance with no known 
law or principle of motion, the whole panorama being an 
unintelligible series of incomprehensible movements. 

But counterparts are not confined to one department; 
they may be found in all directions, in departments of all 
dimensions, from the least to the greatest, from the Universe 
itself down to its least part or particle. It may be instruct- 
ive to consider a few of these: Heat and cold, light and 
darkness, sound and silence, are Counterparts, and illustra- 
tive of the application of the same principles. As we de- 
scend into the bowels of the earth we find the temperature 
increasing in a certain definite ratio; and, on the other 
hand, as we ascend into the atmosphere above the earth we 
find the temperature decreasing in like manner. The 
temperature which we have at the earth's surface is the 
combination, in varying degrees, of these two extremes or 
counterparts; and when we are told that the crust of the 
earth with its enveloping atmosphere bears the same rela- 
tion to its magnitude that the shell of an egg does to its 
bulk, we may form some idea how thin comparatively is 
the space of endurable temperature through which we daily 
pass in our life-pilgrimage, and how narrow the chance of 
our being frozen on the one hand or roasted on the other. 
We are living, as it were, in a species of purgatory, from 
which, however, if we should fall out, either up or down, it 
is doubtful whether we would ever reach heaven. On the 
contrary, this purgatory, if its extremes were harmoniously 



adjusted, would become a vertable heaven itself, so far as 
climate is concerned, since it would be the harmonious ad- 
justment of counterparts, producing a result which no 
heaven could exceed. I speak, of course, only with refer- 
ence to climate, and we have all heard of a "heavenly 
climate." 

Light and darkness are subjected to the same treatment 
as heat and cold, each representing an extreme opposite 
point in this department, and that which addresses the 
sense of sight is the commingling of these extremes or 
Counterparts in varying degrees or proportions. In fact, 
there is a similar gamut for each of the senses, subject to 
the same law, and we need not pursue them in detail. 

If we look through a magnifying glass one way, objects 
appear enlarged, and if we reverse it and look through it 
in the opposite direction, objects appear diminished. This 
suggests the existence of a macrocosm and a microcosm, of 
a great world and a little world, of the infinitely small and 
the infinitely large ; and it is equally clear that the world 
which is presented to our senses is the commingling of these 
two extremes in varying proportions. That is to say, that 
these two aspects are Counterparts of each other, or that the 
infinitely great and the infinitely small constitute, combin- 
edly, the Universe of sensuous impression and perception. 

From the foregoing considerations, we are naturally led 
to the philosophical distinction between Something and 
Nothing. Hegel, the German philosopher, makes the enig- 
matical statement that Something and Nothing are equal — 
enigmatical, however, only to those who have given the 
subject of Counterparts no thought in its wide-spreading 
and all-including implications. If the statement has any 
sense or meaning, it must be found in the direction which 
we are now pursuing, which is, that Something and Noth- 
ing must be considered as Counterparts. lt^ we consider 
Nothing as the negative pole of Something — the least aspect 
of Reality in comparison with the greatest — we shall begin 



to get some meaning out of the statement that Something 
and Nothing are equal ; that is, that they are equal only in 
the sense that each is an opposite extreme of the great 
Universe of Reality, in which they are infinitely commin- 
gled. The general impression is that Nothing is of no 
value, and not that it is of even small value in comparison 
with Something. Reflection, however, will show that they 
must be of equal value, since the value of Something de- 
pends entirely upon the fact that it has a locus or place or 
vacuum in which it can be. But as it is impossible to con- 
ceive of pure Nothing — or, for that matter, of pure Some- 
thing, since Reality, both in the objective and subjective 
realms, is the commingling and compounding of the two — 
it must follow that Nothing is that negative pole of Reality, 
where the least possible quantity of the Something element 
is to be found. The discrimination here sought to be made 
is very well illustrated by Matter and Space, which, co-op- 
erating, form the material world. If there were no Space, 
there could be no room for Matter; so these two become 
another set of Counterparts forming the basis of harmony 
in the material realm, as Something and Nothing constitute 
a like basis in Philosophy. 

Perhaps one step further should be taken in order to 
complete the possible scope of consideration of the subject of 
Counterparts; and that is the distinction between the Ab- 
solute and the Relative. The difference between this pair 
of Counterparts and that last considered under the names of 
Something and Nothing, is one not generally understood, 
and requires a little close thinking to make plain. Noth- 
ing and the Absolute seem so clearly to be companions that 
we need not waste time in attempting to draw distinctions. 
But, as between Something and the Relative, while one — 
that is, Something — is connected with facts and substances, 
the other — the Relative — includes not only these, but also 
the relations subsisting between them. Now, Relations are 
not Substances nor things in any ordinary sense, and there- 



fore can not be included under the term Something, but are 
quite intelligible under that of the Relative; that is, while 
substances or things do not in themselves, except subordi- 
nately and by implication, include Relations, yet Relations 
can subsist only as between substances or entities. 

Now the Absolute and the Relative are so all-conclusive 
that we can find no greater or more extensive terms to de- 
scribe or express our ideas of Universal Being. The idea 
sought to be expressed by this term, the Relative, is that of 
Universal Being as it stands out before the mind in all its 
variety and multiplicity, both of entity and phenomena, in 
time and space, and so specifically as to be capable of ex- 
amination in detail down to its least elements. All modes, 
all forms, all essences, all relations, considered in their gen- 
eral, individual, special and particular aspects, go to make 
up the idea of the Relative Universe. The Absolute, on the 
other hand, is the same Universe of Being, considered now, 
however, as undiscriminated or undifferentiated, so com- 
mingled and compounded as to be incapable of distinction 
of parts; in short, one mass in which there are no possible 
lines of demarcation. 

The description of the Jewish Jehovah is here recalled : 
" With whom is no variableness neither shadow of turning." 
It will become apparent that the attempt to realize the Ab- 
solute can never be successful, since the individuality of the 
thinker, if he were successful, would be wiped out along 
with all other discriminations. So the distinction between 
the Absolute and the Relative is merely an aspect or mode 
of considering the Universe, and, though not practical ly 
possible, yet it contains practical considerations of far-reach- 
ing importance. It is hardly necessary to point out that 
the Actual Universe of perception and conception is the 
commingling of these two Counterparts in such proportions 
as the particular individual mind may be able to make. 

At the risk of taxing your patience, I will advert to the 
criticism, sometimes made, that it is impossible to think the 



Absolute or to think Nothing, because all thinking must be 
relative, that is, that we must have, at least, two things 
before the mind in order to think at all. In other words, 
that we can not think Nothing or the Absolute, pure and 
simple, as totally unrelated to all things contained in their 
opposites, Something and the Relative. But in answer to 
this, while strictly it is no doubt true, yet it may be said 
that, as fundamental elements of thinking, the Absolute and 
Nothing, as correlatives of the Relative and Something, re- 
spectively, are just as thinkable as that one and one are 
two. It must not be supposed from this, however, that we 
are capable of thinking infinitely, as there must be a point 
at which we must stop thinking; but that we can think In- 
finity as an element of a logical proposition, is as clear as 
that one can be thought in the proposition that one and one 
make two. 

We have thus far considered only the material or object- 
ive aspect of the Universe. But it may be said that it has 
another aspect, if there is not, as some contend, an entirely 
different Universe, known under many names, as Mind, 
Spirit, Life, Subjective, all of which carry the implication of 
non-materiality and non-objectivity — a world which can 
not be known by the exercise of the senses, but must be 
cognized by the intellectual powers alone, sometimes called 
Faith, sometimes Inspiration, sometimes Reason and some- 
times Intuition, defined as ability to know something be- 
yond the scope of the special senses. 

Without adopting any of the attempted definitions of this 
department, we may, for the purpose of reference, call it the 
Spiritual World, in contradistinction to the Material World, 
which we have been considering, and we may legitimately 
endeavor to ascertain whether these two furnish another set 
of Counterparts, the understanding of which, and their mu- 
tual relations, shall throw light upon some of the problems 
of existence hitherto unexplained or only partially and un- 
certainly understood. 



8 

But, however we may view Mind and Matter, or the Ma- 
terial and the Spiritual — whether we consider them as part 
and parcel of Universal Being, or as so separated that there 
is no relation between them — it is certain that there is a 
connection between them through the medium of sense-per- 
ceptions in their relation to intellectual actions ; and it is 
by means of this connection that we are able to comprehend 
the existence of Mind ; for we can not describe Mind except 
in terms of Matter. The very words Mind, Spirit, Life, are 
primarily descriptive of material acts or facts, and it is only 
by using these terms in a secondary or derivative sense that 
we can refer to the non-material part of our being. To the 
purely sensuous savage, there is nothing but the material 
man; to him there is no soul, or mind, or spirit, because 
these are invisible, and can not be perceived till the intel- 
lectual or spiritual vision becomes developed. 

In spite of the difficulties of Language — its inadequacy to 
deal with this hidden and occult portion of our nature — let 
us try to see whether we can trace the operation of the same 
law in this domain as in that of the material universe. 
Commencing with special aspects, we find that there is an 
antipodal relation between the mental qualities of Love and 
Hate, Joy and Sorrow, Pleasure and Pain, Knowledge and 
Ignorance, Reason and Insanity, etc., as we found in the 
material domain between heat and cold, light and darkness, 
sound and silence, etc. As we found these latter to be 
Counterparts of each other materially, so mentally the qual- 
ities I have mentioned must be considered in like manner 
as Counterparts. In so doing, we are compelled to think 
along the same lines, that is, from one extreme to its opposite. 

In the broader generalizations of Religion and Morals. 
we find the same condition of things. God and the Devil, 
Heaven and Hell, Good and Evil, Right and Wrong, reveal 
the same oppositional characteristics. It will be observed 
that these are pure creations of the mind, based, no doubt, 
upon observation of the facts of the external world. We 



picture Heaven and Hell as places, the one of supreme en- 
joyment, the other of supreme suffering, thus representing 
the extremes in this respect. So, likewise, God and the 
Devil represent two ideal personages of opposite character- 
istics, one of supreme goodness, purity and truth, the other 
standing for all that is opposed to these. Right and 
Wrong, again, are qualities of polar opposition, and may be 
said to be Counterparts in the moral domain. 

These instances, both in the material and non-material 
realms, are sufficient to convince us that Counterparts do 
actually exist; that is, that there are things, conditions, 
qualities, of such opposite character that, ordinarily, it 
seems impossible that they can coexist — that their natures 
are so at war with each other that the first impression nat- 
urally would be that they must mutually destroy each 
other, "nor leave a vestige behind." 

The most marked instance of Counterparts, and one in 
which we are more interested than in any other, is that be- 
tween Life and Death. Akin to this is that known under 
the terms Consciousness and Unconsciousness. These are 
closely allied; that is, during Life we are Conscious, while 
Death deprives us of Consciousness, at least so far as the 
facts of the external world are concerned. 

But now another feature presents itself, heretofore inci- 
dentally referred to. While, theoretically or ideally, we 
may consider the extremes of these various Counterparts as 
the basis of harmony, the Actual is really their combina- 
tions in varying proportions, and in these combinations are 
to be found the thousand and one varieties of philosophies, 
theories, sciences and arts, as well as the innumerable prac- 
tical methods instituted among men the world over since 
man began. In mechanics, all movements depend upon 
opposite forces; in Astronomy we have centripetal and cen- 
trifugal tendencies; in electricity the highest result thus far 
attained is by the alternation of positive and negative cur- 
rents, and it is noticeable that this latter result, the most won- 



10 

derful in all history, is produced only when the alternation 
of positive and negative is made exact and equal. In Art 
the same rule holds; in painting the due commingling of 
Light and Shade with Color produces the best effect; in 
music harmony is reached by the combination both of 
Sound and Silence and high and low tones in just and true 
proportions. In Philosophy the constant tendency is to 
include more and more the facts and qualities of Universal 
Being, however opposite in their character, and it has now 
come to be the accepted doctrine that nothing can be 
omitted which can by possibility be conceived by the hu- 
man mind or affect human interests. 

Now the Universe is one, and in this One are to be found 
all possibilities, all powers, all entities, all relations, and all 
essences. This complex, then, which we call the Universe, 
must be a Consistency; that is, however various its parts, 
however apparently contradictory its myriad-fold aspects to 
our limited vision, yet Reason tells us that these parts must 
be components of that which is so much greater than they 
that they all find a place and a function, an arena for their 
operation and a faculty for harmonious interaction. As 
light, heat and electricity have full play, each for its own 
special action without danger of interference, although all 
occupying the same domain — that is, the air — so all the 
powers, forces and essences in the Universe act, react and 
interact, not only without interference, but with that co-or- 
dination which constitutes the harmony of Universal Being. 
The Universe is an arena large enough for the display of all 
that the imagination can conceive or thought can compass; 
and all its domains and departments, down to their least 
parts and particles, are so indissolubly connected by the 
operation of Universal Law that no single atom can be de- 
stroyed and no single domain blotted out. The Spirit of the 
Universe is in them all, through them all and around them all ? 
sustaining, connecting, preserving and continuing them in 
their sublime on-going. 



11 

Order is said to be Heaven's first law. In the broadest 
view, the Universe must be considered as equivalent to 
Heaven, since no amount of apparent disorder can affect its 
harmony and beauty. What we call disorder is only seem- 
ing. As Pope says: 

"All Nature is but Art, unknown to thee ; 
All chance, direction whjch thou canst not see ; 
All discord, harmony not understood ; 
All partial evil, universal good ; 
And, spite of Pride, in erring Reason's spite, 
One truth is clear, Whatever is, is right." 

From the Universal point of view, each thing has its 
place and performs its function, and this place and this 
function are exactly what they must be, because they are 
exactly right. What we call Right and Wrong are purely 
relative, and depend entirely upon our own limited powers 
of perception. There is no universal Wrong. 

What effect must the contemplation of this order and har- 
mony have upon the character of the individual ? When he 
reflects that he is part and parcel of Universal Being, subject 
to its laws, upheld, sustained, cared for by Infinite Power 
and Affection, with no possibility, in all the eventualities of 
Time and Change, of being either actually lost, misplaced, 
or neglected, what tremendous influence for high and noble 
aspiration and performance must exert itself upon the mind ! 
We seek pleasure and avoid pain because constrained by the 
laws of our being, which are the Laws of Universal Being ; 
but present pleasure may be the cause of future pain, and 
present pain that of future pleasure, which seems to be con- 
tradictory. This, however, is one of the indications of the 
principle of Counterparts, as showing that Pleasure and 
Pain are extremes which, in the whirligig of Time, are 
brought alternately in the ascendant, and that which at one 
stage is Pleasure, at another becomes Pain, and vice versa. 
Time itself — one of the extremes in the Counterparts Time 
and Eternity — works such wondrous changes that at one 



12 

point we perceive one of the Counterparts or extremes, and 
at another point the other is brought into view. Pope 
again says: 

"Love, hope and joy, fair pleasure's smiling train, 
Hate, fear and grief, the family of pain ; 
These mixed with art, and to due bounds confined, 
Make and maintain the balance of the mind ; 
The lights and shades, whose well-accorded strife 
Gives all the strength and color to our life." 

The Actual, being thus the commingling of extremes, it 
becomes us to comprehend and make the golden mean the 
rule of our lives — what the French call the juste milieu or 
just medium between opposites. We can not do exactly 
right, or absolutely right — only God can do that, because he' 
is the Absolute. All our acts must be more or less a mix- 
ture of that which is right and that which is wrong, or that 
which is straight — for right means straight — and that which 
is crooked, for wrong means twisted or turned or bent from 
the exact straight or level. Hence, while we have ideally 
an absolute standard of morals, we can only approximate, 
as near as possible, to that standard, without expectation of 
ever absolutely reaching it. And if we can not, for our- 
selves, hope for more than approximation toward perfection, 
how much charity must we have for those who may be a 
little below us in power of understanding and action. In 
thinking of our sinning fellow-creatures, should we not 
adopt that rule embodying so much wisdom: "Judge not, 
lest ye be judged" ? 

Under the influence of the Golden Mean, we should not 
allow either the fear of hell or the hope of heaven to swerve 
us unduly. I say unduly, because they will, and rightly, 
influence us to some extent. As heaven means extreme 
order and hell means extreme disorder, our constant effort 
must be to cling to the one and avoid the other. In this 
view, however, it is seen that Language does not exactly 
represent the facts of the Universe as we are now trying to 



13 

present them, for there must be a modicum of disorder even 
in the greatest order, and there can be no disorder so great 
that it has not, at least, the implication of order. The fin- 
est tuning of the piano can not totally expel the "wolf" of 
discord. And this may also be said of the actual condition 
between the extremes of all the Counterparts to be found in 
Universal Nature. Absolute exactness can be found only 
in the Ideal; the Actual must always contain elements of 
inexactness. 

No finer perception or expression of the wonderful con- 
trariety and oppositional character of the spirit of Universal 
Nature can probably be found in all literature than Emer- 
son's brief description of Brahma: 

If the Red Slayer think he slays, 

Or if the Slain think he is slain, 
They know not well the subtle ways 

I come and pass and turn again. 

Far or forgot to me is near, 

Sunlight and shadow are the same ; 
The vanished gods to me appear, 

And one to me are shame and fame. 

They reckon ill who leave me out, 

When me they fly, I am the wings ; 
I am the doubter and the doubt, 

And I the hymn the Brahmin sings. 

The strong gods pine for my abode, 
And pine in vain the sacred Seven ; 

But thou, meek lover of the good, 
Find me, and turn thy back on heaven. 

M. A. Clancy. 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 



021 074 307 8 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 

111 



021 074 307 8 



